in any case ANY updates CANNOT be introduced in the middle of any era. They should only apply when new eras start. People start eras with a certain strategy and it is both childish and disrespectful to change the rules mid-era.

Agree to that. But not all, I think only the 4th, 6th and 9th must be implement after the round reset. The rest is ok. Only updates that change the gameplay like the alliance limit and the power limit must be implement after the round reset.

Anyway I haven't played the Old Client so I don't know about the spy thing. I think I need to have a detailed instruction about this matter. BattleDawn Wiki should be updated.

The updated spy system can be summed up as:You have 1 spy. That spy can place agents in up to 10 outposts/colonies. The spy will be able to move around the map as it does now. And all the agents will have the same options as normal spies have today.

_________________

Code:

http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076Thank you developers(^-check out the topics)

Yeah the spy overhaul changes them considerably. I already have several additions I want to make to the system too .

But we'll put them on first in a more simplified launch and then add more features to make them more interesting. Please toss us feedback on the new spies for the next few months, I'll be looking into the new balance carefully.

Also as Simmen mentioned the staff are planning to make an appearance to kick some booty soon . Going to make a 10 person(Not just men on the staff now!) alliance and play competitively! We fully expect to get our butts kicked though and we'll be playing regular accounts, no super units or admin assistance or anything.

So if you are annoyed at any of our updates(Garry... ) you can come beat us up in game!

Oh also I closed the other thread I made earlier today about the updates and linked to this one.

Sorry about the double post, but the other thread was closed and I had to reply here:

Quote:

Allen, with all due respect. I think the ones who made the game know why it was made.

So are you trying to tell me, no one else knows why the delay feature was implemented? Please do educate us.

Quote:

Its not a question if its legitimate ways or not. Its a matter of why it was added and the balance of the game. I know we do some things that are "less popular", but that is because we need to think about the balance of the game, and people saving up huge amounts of oil was not taken into concideration when that balance was made. That is why we need to act.

Its ridiculous to think that people can save huge amounts of oil. Dont blindly use "balance" as a reason. What balance are you talking about? What cases did you see that told you people save "huge" amounts of oil? By "huge" what figure is that? 20k oil? 40 k? Remember when people save oil, they dont do anything else. At the max they save 5k oil when they sleep, in an active alliance and in an inactive alliance, the income is just too low to save anything. So you are not balancing anything, you are just taking away an option that people have to legitimately innovate a way to earn resources ingame.

Quote:

Allen, the reason the amount of resources is lowered is because we want people to be more careful with their units, not thinking "I'll have that army back in 50 ticks anyway with the help of my allies"Because that is when you have to think tactical, value every unit, think of every step you make

Those changes got nothing to do with boosting,

One thing is to try and give me a reason. Another thing is to try and insult my intelligence. "Be careful with units", are you kidding me? People are always careful. Your agenda is to gradually reduce resources in every world, so you can force people to boost.Thats that.

Quote:

Allen, don't trust "quotes" that have never been said in the first place

What "quotes"? I am intelligent enough to see through the BS thats all. Why would you talk about a "quote" that I never even brought up in the first place, I wonder. Was something really said somewhere, that confirms my claims or what?

Quote:

Can you please enlighten me to when it was 18k as I can only recall it being 10k, then increased to 15k?

What did you not play BD ? It was never 10k dude, It was 18k. That was when I joined BD. When there were settlements and such.

Quote:

Allen, the feature was never meant to be used in such a way. Therefore it was always looked on the way we want to look at it. You should look at how this effect the gameplay and only help those who are already the strongest.

Thats not even a reason. This is a strategy game. There is no "this is the way it was suppoesed to be" concept here. If you want to make a pattern based game with a rock, paper and scissors approach to everything, then that is no strategy game at all. Strategy should allow room for innovation and everytime someone is creative enough, that has to be restricted for the purpose of forcing boosting. Oil saving is a common thing in BD and it does not just help the strongest. It helps everyone.

Quote:

As I've said a couple times before. It is not about the money, but about the balance and not letting those who are already have the power and advantage get a even larger one.

That is just one reason of yours I dont believe. Nothing you do, actually "balances" the game. Balance what against what? Balance the game between boosters and non boosters? NO. Its about balancing the need for resources ingame, and token spending or should I say, unbalance it, so that people spend more. Spending more is not the problem, even I am ready to spend. But trying to suck money out of people, is what makes you feel cheated.

Yeah Id gladly do it considering the direction the updates are going with respect to restricting oil changes. The other updates seem to be fine.

A question about the spy though: Will the master spy protect the colony? Adding infiltration points and act as spy protection?

I'll answer the other and longer one later since I just woke up after far to little sleep

No, the only way to be safe from a spy attack is now to use spy protection. I think the price of spy protection might be tweaked but I can't see it in the topic. So I'm assuming it hasn't been done yet.

Maolain wrote:

I like most of these ideas, with the exception of having up to 10 spies. However, I am willing to try it. 10 seems a bit too many though, maybe 7 or 8

The spies needs more power. And its not like the agents can be placed anywhere, the spy got to travel there first

_________________

Code:

http://battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=4690Thank you Michael http://www.battledawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=111&t=15076Thank you developers(^-check out the topics)

No, the only way to be safe from a spy attack is now to use spy protection. I think the price of spy protection might be tweaked but I can't see it in the topic. So I'm assuming it hasn't been done yet.

Okay so with this update, you have increased Energy costs. So is this gonna be compensated or like you always say "balanced" by providing alternate ways of making energy or like you said, E costs for spy protection "tweaked"? Sure hope so. I am not sure why, when you bring in a feature like mandating manual spy protection, you dont think about tweaking spy protection costs right then and there. I mean its very clear that this is needed. Anyway, hope to see some "balancing"

No, the only way to be safe from a spy attack is now to use spy protection. I think the price of spy protection might be tweaked but I can't see it in the topic. So I'm assuming it hasn't been done yet.

Okay so with this update, you have increased Energy costs. So is this gonna be compensated or like you always say "balanced" by providing alternate ways of making energy or like you said, E costs for spy protection "tweaked"? Sure hope so. I am not sure why, when you bring in a feature like mandating manual spy protection, you dont think about tweaking spy protection costs right then and there. I mean its very clear that this is needed. Anyway, hope to see some "balancing"

Increased energy costs? Hmmm i don't like increased energy costs... and i say, put the iron value back too 200 , it was much better back then ;(

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum